English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Most investigations into the large-scale patterns of protein evolution are based on gene annotations that have been compiled in reference databases. The use of these resources for quantitative comparisons, however, is complicated by sometimes vast differences in coverage. More importantly, however, we also observe substantial ascertainment biases that cannot be removed by simple normalization procedures. A striking example is provided by the correlations between protein domains. We observe that statistics derived from different computational gene annotation procedure show dramatic discrepancies, and even qualitative changes from negative to positive correlation, when compared to statistics obtained from annotation databases.

Pitfalls of ascertainment biases in genome annotations—computing comparable protein domain distributions in eukarya